Exodus International dropping membership in PATH

I was notified of this information by email today and reproduce it with permission.

Dear PATH Board of Directors,

As of today, April 3, 2007, Exodus International is relinquishing its membership with the PATH Coalition. Please remove all of our information from the PATH website upon receipt of this email.

Sincerely, Alan Chambers

President, Exodus International

PATH stands for Positive Alternatives to Homosexuality

UPDATE: 4/13/07 – Dave Pruden, executive director of Evergreen International told me today by phone that EI is also dropping PATH membership.

Print Friendly

  • Michael Bussee

    Gee at this rate, they’re gonna run out of affiliations pretty soon. What other organizations should they drop?

  • Boo

    While they’re at it, maybe they should stop promoting the work of Paul Cameron:

    http://www.randythomas.org/blog/2007/03/gay_unions_and_.html

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/ Warren

    I am told other groups have or are about to leave PATH. More to come…

  • Lynn David

    I doubt Courage is on the ball about this, so they will stay associated. Evergreen International should be pulling out [is that an appropriate terminalogy?] since NARTH is now headed by Evergreen people. I’d hope that People Can Change would,they’ve always struck me as rather pragmatic about this issue.

    But the real question is what whill PFOX do?

  • gordo

    My personal hope is that all concerned will carve out space for individuals to follow their conscience and belief system

    I don’t think that’s what James Dobson expects to get for his money.

  • Michael Bussee

    Warren, do you see these recant devlopments as indicating big trouble in the ex-gay movement? I do. It seems to be fragmenting. No concensus on causes or cures. People in the movement saying “we’re not with him or them”. Everyone scrambling to distance themselves from this ministry or that.

    The ex-gay movement wants respect and trust. How can we? They feel we are picking on them unjustly. Given recent events, how on earth would a therapist or pastor determine which organization was “on target” enough to make confident referrals and which should be avoided at all cost?

    One EXOUDS affiliate referred to the challenge as “cat-herding”. So many questions: Can we trust EXODUS? NARTH? Which affiliates are competent? Which ones are “fringe” or just plain weird? Have politics and embarrasing media blunders over-shdowed ministry? Who is associated with who? Has anyone been trained? Are Schonewolf and Berger still around?

    Should we just wait until this dust dust settles? Maybe the ex-gay movement should hold conference or something to get their act together.

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/ Warren

    Yes, I think the dust is settling and will be for awhile. One reason I advocate for guidelines (which you have endorsed – thank you) is this very question of credibility.

    I personally think Exodus is moving in a good direction — but I have many issues with other players in this arena. My personal hope is that all concerned will carve out space for individuals to follow their conscience and belief system.

  • Eddy

    I’m thinking back to a lighthearted response I read once giving directions to the ‘gay community’; perhaps someone could show me the score to the ‘ex-gay movement’.

    I applaud Exodus for having the courage to rethink some of their alliances. In my opinion, Exodus’ message was being obscured and it’s reputation tarnished by association with these more politically motivated groups. I think Exodus will emerge stronger and more focussed when the dust settles.

  • Michael Bussee

    I completetly agree with Ed that “Exodus’ message was being obscured and it’s reputation tarnished by association with these more politically motivated groups.”

    I hope they will exercise more caution. I think it would be a really good idea for them to get out of poitics altogether — and not because I disagree with their politics (which I strongly do).

    They need to think about the individual gay person, perhaps unfamiliar with the Christian message of hope and redemption, and stick to ministry — conveying the Gospel to gays and lesbians who are understandably suspicious of the “church”. Gay and Lebsian “seekers” should not have to feel like they are joining a political movement.

    This is precisely why we “founders” took great pains to avoid politics. Perhaps EXODUS could hire a Public Relations Advisor to help them be more careful with their affiliations and public image and help prevent these kinds of embarassments.

  • http://www.exgaywatch.com Timothy Kincaid

    In my opinion, Exodus’ message was being obscured and it’s reputation tarnished by association with these more politically motivated groups.

    More politically motivated than Exodus? I don’t think that’s possible. Is there anyone who has tried to influence public policy more than Alan?

  • gordo

    I hope they will exercise more caution. I think it would be a really good idea for them to get out of poitics altogether — and not because I disagree with their politics (which I strongly do).

    I’m confused, Michael. Do you want Exodus to reform, be less political, more honest about what they do, or do you want them to go out of business? All your effort to get Alan to put in policies and change this and that seems like nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig.

  • Michael Bussee

    Of course I would like to see EXODUS “go out of business”. I pray for the day that GLBT people will no longer be indoctrinated to believe that gay is bad or changeworthy.

    In the meantime, to live to see Exodus “reform, be less political and more honest about what they do” would make me feel a little less guilty for having played a part in creating it in the first place.

  • http://www.exgaywatch.com Timothy Kincaid

    I don’t really know where to put this… but at least this thread mentions Evergreen so it’s the closest.

    Of NARTH, Evergreen, or Brigham Young, it was BYU that first recognized that identity and behavior are not the same thing. BYU’s brand-new policy revisions on homosexuality (which had nothing, nothing I tell you, to do with SoulForce) now read as follows:

    One’s stated sexual orientation is not an Honor Code issue. However, the Honor Code requires all members of the university community to manifest a strict commitment to the law of chastity

    Prior wording forbid “advocacy” (recognition of) sexual orientation regardless of one’s actual sexual behavior:

    Advocacy of a homosexual lifestyle (whether implied or explicit) or any behaviors that indicate homosexual conduct, including those not sexual in nature, are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code.

    Interesting that sometimes it’s those who don’t spend their full-time efforts on “reaching out” to strugglers that actually get it. So now gay Mormans attending BYU can join their straight counterparts in celibacy until marriage (which of course is not ever allowed). I consider this a positive step.

  • http://www.exgaywatch.com Timothy Kincaid

    Ooops.

    The article is here

    http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5684555


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X